The Kremlin’s version of the “voluntary accession of Crimea” is circulating again

In a distributed messagewhich received the approval of a number of Internet users, talks about the right of states to self-determination established by the United Nations Organization (UN), saying that based on this principle, the annexation of Crimea should be seen as an expression of the will of the people of the peninsula, and not as a seizure of Ukrainian lands.

“Crimea became a Russian region in 2014. March. after the referendum held after the coup in Ukraine. During 2014 96.77% of the referendum of voters in Crimea and 95.6 percent. In Sevastopol, he advocated joining Russia.

Referendums on the joining of the Donetsk People’s Republic (DLR), Luhansk People’s Republic (LLR), Kherson and Zaporizhia regions to the Russian Federation took place in 2022. September 23-27 Based on 100% according to the results of the processing of the ballots, 99.23 percent of DLR voted for joining the Russian Federation. of those who voted, LLR – 98.42 percent, Kherson region – 87.05 percent, Zaporozhye region – 93.11 percent.

September 30 Russian President Vladimir Putin gave a speech in the Kremlin on the results of these referendums, after which he signed agreements with the heads of their regions on the admission of these regions to Russia.”– according to a post on the social network Facebook.

The right of self-determination

Interestingly, neither the UN Charter nor other UN documents provide for such a “decision”.

The most authoritative source of valid international law is United Nations CharterSecurity Council resolutions (binding on all UN members) and General Assembly resolutions (advisory in nature).

Imago / Scanpix photo / UN Security Council

The UN Charter actually enshrines the right of peoples to self-determination. However, its content and form of implementation are not detailed in any way.

It is mentioned in only two places – Article 1 (which is about developing friendly relationships “between nations based on respect for the principle of equality and self-determination of nations”) and Article 55 (to create “conditions of stability and prosperity necessary for peaceful and friendly relations between nations based on respect for the principle of equality and self-determination of nations”).

However in 1970 In the declaration (full name – “Declaration of Principles of International Law Relating to Friendly Relations and Cooperation among States under the Charter of the United Nations”) the content of this right is quite clear:

“The territory of a colony or other non-self-governing territory has, under the Charter, a separate and distinct status from the territory of the state governing it; such separate and distinct status under the Charter exists until the people of the colony or non-self-governing territory concerned exercise their right to self-determination under the Charter, particularly in accordance with its purposes and principles.”

At the same time, it specifically states:

“None of the preceding paragraphs may be interpreted as authorizing or encouraging any actions that would, in whole or in part, disintegrate or violate the territorial integrity or political unity of sovereign and independent states, which in their activities adhere to the above-mentioned principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples and for it has governments representing without distinction of race, creed or color all the people living in the respective territory.”

Imago/Scanpix Photo/United Nations

Crimea, Donbass and Kherson region are not colonies

This means that only colonies and dependent territories have the unconditional right to self-determination.

Since Ukraine has never been a colonial state, this norm does not apply to it in principle.

In addition, in the official in the list of non-self-governing territorieswhich the United Nations has today, there are no Ukrainian lands.

Thus, neither Crimea nor the oblasts of Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson and Zaporizhia had the right to self-determination in principle – even without touching on the many other factors that make the “referendums” held there legally null and void.

Referendum without following the rules and the law

in 2014 February. Russia’s seizure of Crimea began when Russian special forces, operating without state insignia, seized the Crimean parliament building and raised the Russian flag.

After the invasion of the bloodless so-called “green men”, control of the peninsula was taken over by Russian soldiers wearing no insignia.

The subsequent referendum on the status of Crimea, which was held under military occupation, did not allow for public debate or for Ukrainian political leaders to visit the Crimean peninsula.

Constitution of Ukraine Article 73 providesthat issues of territorial integrity and changing state borders must be resolved only in a national (not regional) referendum.

Therefore, according to the norms approved by the Venice Commission (and, accordingly, the Council of Europe), the Crimean “referendum” was by definition illegal.

Referendum to voters were submitted two alternative questions: “Do you support the rejoining of Crimea to Russia with the rights of a subject of the Russian Federation?” (yes or no) and “Do you support the restoration of the 1992 constitution of the Republic of Crimea and the status of Crimea as part of Ukraine?” (yes or no).

Reuters/Scanpix photo/Referendum advertisement in Crimea

Although Russia for a long time claimed that 96.77 percent voters spoke up for reunification with Russia, the Russian Human Rights Council itself in the report it is stated that only 15-30 percent eligible voters in Crimea voted for reunification with Russia.

Although the pro-Russian authorities claim that the referendum showed that the people of Crimea are rushing into the arms of Russia, the results are not recognized by the West, and there were many violations during the referendum.

Read more: The pro-Russian Crimean authorities declare that the referendum has taken place, and that 96.6 percent of the people are rushing into Russia’s arms. Crimean residents

None of the options proposed during the referendum did not allow citizens vote to maintain the status quo.

Referendum also violated Constitution of Ukrainebecause it did not give the right to all Ukrainian citizens to vote on the status of Crimea.

15min verdict: missing context. The facts are presented in a manipulative manner, the interpretation of UN legal principles and acts is biased.

The publication was prepared in 15 minutes in partnership with Metawhich aims to stop the spread of misleading news on the social network. More about the program and its rules – here.